hahaha! im top of the league there kenny britt! so much for that argument! lol

And I nenver said Sproles wasnt a starter...Just that Burleson wasn't. I have him in my other league. the only reason he plays is due to Dez getting hurt. Nate if a flex play at best. so like I said...your real trade was a RB for a RB..with a lil fluff thrown in. those NEVER go thru.

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

September 28th, 2011, 12:06 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: 2011 Lionbacker Yahoo Fantasy Football League

Not fluff if his team doesn't see that player as a "fluff" player. That is the difference, you have to look at his team and the impact. IMO I think Burleson is a better FF WR than 3 of his 4 WR starting. In a perfect world with even distribution of talent it may not make sense but in the world where people get hurt and other players don't seem to work out you have situations where people are lacking depth at certain positions.

And I said I give all types of trade I was hoping you felt unhappy with your QB... you didn't.

Not fluff if his team doesn't see that player as a "fluff" player. That is the difference, you have to look at his team and the impact. IMO I think Burleson is a better FF WR than 3 of his 4 WR starting. In a perfect world with even distribution of talent it may not make sense but in the world where people get hurt and other players don't seem to work out you have situations where people are lacking depth at certain positions.

And I said I give all types of trade I was hoping you felt unhappy with your QB... you didn't.

That's OK, I just offered steensn a steensn trade - Daniel Thomas and Mohamed Massaquoi for Chris Johnson. That is more than a fair trade considering Thomas has more FF points than Johnson and I'm adding a WR.

Accept none of those two would start for me at all, where as both the guys I sent you would or could start depending on your view of them. If you don't see the vaule, you don't trade, not every trade comes through because of that. If you think long term you're better with who you have, cool, but don't give me this asinine idea that what I proposed was THAT unfair.

Accept none of those two would start for me at all, where as both the guys I sent you would or could start depending on your view of them. If you don't see the vaule, you don't trade, not every trade comes through because of that. If you think long term you're better with who you have, cool, but don't give me this asinine idea that what I proposed was THAT unfair.

I won't, I will leave that up to everyone else. Then again, a first round pick for some spares picked up in the 8th and 14th rounds sounds fair to someone who thinks the BCS is a fair way to determine a champion as well.

Prior to the season, draft position is the only thing to go by. Once the season starts, stats matter. And yes, it will come down to each person's perceived value, but you're expecting everyone to view things like you do, and if we think differently, we're "assinine" to think so. The majority has always seen your "view" of fair trade to be completely out of wack.

No one's stopping you from making the trade offers, but you can't get upset when we laugh hysterically at them.

September 28th, 2011, 3:16 pm

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 9596Location: Dallas

Re: 2011 Lionbacker Yahoo Fantasy Football League

njroar wrote:

No one's stopping you from making the trade offers, but you can't get upset when we laugh hysterically at them.

Is it possible to stop him? I worry that one of these days I'm going to accidently hit "accept" on my tiny iPhone to one of these bogus trades. There needs to be a "ban trading" option for an owner like this.

I don't get upset when someone laughs at a long shot, but when someone takes a clearly fair trade and tries to make up reasons for it being bogus I'm going to say something.

If someone says they want to back out the day after I have no qualms in giving them the benefit fo the doubt. You accidently hit it and the next day want out I'll tell Sly to kill it myself. There is no risk here, I'm not trying to trick anyone. Just looking for situations someone feels is better for them.

Every single "clearly unfair" trade I have made to date hasn't panned out... why? because there was clear risk involved with the person Nate was giving up. CJ hadn't gone through any camp, it shows, he's not scoring crap. Steve Smith was a 7th round with a rookie QB that clearly isn't going to be consistent for a QB after 3 weeks who is ranked as the fifth best FF QB to date who as well is under question for long term scoring possibilities.

With all the seemingly "obvious" unfairness no one wants to be consistent on their criteria and risk/reward decisions. You don't asinine comments saying you think you wouldn't take the trade, you make asinine comments saying that it is "obviously unfair" and there is no chance that the trade should go through. And guess what, so far you have all been wrong, imagine that.

I'm not asking for you guys to stop speaking your opinion, I'm asking you guys to stop assuming your ideas on how to play FF and what is good ro bad should override someone else who is not trying to trade away players and give up, but rather do what he thinks will help his team.

Prior to the start of the season, draft value (a first round pick) for a QB to replace someone everyone knew was hurt, was autopicked by someone that left the default rankings in, that didn't come close to draft value, isn't an even trade. Not even close. Prior to any stats being collected, draft position is the only criteria to value.

Once the season starts, trading the #1 point scorer for someone even that person knows is a backup isn't an even trade. Draft position now after week 2, when this trade took place, means nothing and production does. It wasn't even the total point values that flagged it, it was the same type of trade with the same person that makes it look like a wink wink, nod nod type of deal.

The fact that when questioned and people gave their reasons, you started insulted those reasons as if everyone's opinions are stupid. Your view of value isn't the same as everyone else. What you believe makes sense doesn't for everyone else. We're going to disagree with value, but when you start insulting people because they don't just agree to everything you deem fair, its not about the trade anymore it becomes about you. Most of the foolishness about both trades could have been avoided if you didn't argue why they were SO fair. The more you argue about anything, the more it feels better to protest it.

September 28th, 2011, 6:52 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: 2011 Lionbacker Yahoo Fantasy Football League

njroar wrote:

The criteria changes, as does the perspective of value.

Prior to the start of the season, draft value (a first round pick) for a QB to replace someone everyone knew was hurt, was autopicked by someone that left the default rankings in, that didn't come close to draft value, isn't an even trade. Not even close. Prior to any stats being collected, draft position is the only criteria to value.

Draft position ONLY has value at the day of the draft. As the weeks pass the realization that Manning was not going to play set in (which you guys argues with me that I was trying make up stuff to help myself out... oops) CJ as well was starting to be seen as a liability as he had not yet been signed and had not practiced one day. At that point draft position means nothing if both players were drafted higher than their actual value, which they were. Also, you now have a team to be concerned about, not just a pick... more data goes into the criteria to make your decision, not JUST draft position, especially two overvalued players.

BTW, without autopick someone would have nabbed Manning.

njroar wrote:

Once the season starts, trading the #1 point scorer for someone even that person knows is a backup isn't an even trade. Draft position now after week 2, when this trade took place, means nothing and production does. It wasn't even the total point values that flagged it, it was the same type of trade with the same person that makes it look like a wink wink, nod nod type of deal.

He traded for the 5th rated FF QB for a guy that will absolutaly NOT continue to be the #1 scorer and you, myself, and everyone else knows this. If you value Steve Smith as the #1 WR based on two weeks of performance I pitty you...

Further, to suggest that Nate and I would work like that is appauling... Unless he decided he had given up after week 2, which who would even think that, I would watch yourself for saying things like that.

njroar wrote:

The fact that when questioned and people gave their reasons, you started insulted those reasons as if everyone's opinions are stupid. Your view of value isn't the same as everyone else. What you believe makes sense doesn't for everyone else. We're going to disagree with value, but when you start insulting people because they don't just agree to everything you deem fair, its not about the trade anymore it becomes about you. Most of the foolishness about both trades could have been avoided if you didn't argue why they were SO fair. The more you argue about anything, the more it feels better to protest it.

I could have let is slide, but we are on a discussion board so I discussed it. I didn't say the reasons for not liking the trade or not agreeing with it's value for Nate was stupid... I said the idea that those reasons for not liking the trade had enough merit to keep the trade from happening were stupid. There is a reason that most trades never go through, it is because the percieved value on either side is higher than the others. Trades that do go through both parties see a value in trading. Nate thinks his team is better off in the long run with the guys I traded him for than the guys I got. So far he has been RIGHT. If this was so clear cut uneven and your guys opinions on the trades were so clear cut... why are you and I know wrong on our assessment?

No one's stopping you from making the trade offers, but you can't get upset when we laugh hysterically at them.

Is it possible to stop him? I worry that one of these days I'm going to accidently hit "accept" on my tiny iPhone to one of these bogus trades. There needs to be a "ban trading" option for an owner like this.

Great suggestion, Pablo. This is something that I'm going to seriously think about.

_________________

September 29th, 2011, 12:20 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: 2011 Lionbacker Yahoo Fantasy Football League

Oh brother... you guys really think I would follow through on a trade accepted by accident? Who here is that much of a jerk to not give the other person a day to change their mind. Are we all playing this THAT serious? Really?

Steensn, yes we do. You've proven to be a douche like that, so nothing you do would surprise us anymore. More importantly, you've brought this all upon yourself due to your own actions, so you have no one to blame besides yourself.

_________________

September 29th, 2011, 1:23 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: 2011 Lionbacker Yahoo Fantasy Football League

I have? I have had someone take a trade and say "I don't want to do it, it was an accident" and I forced it to go through? Really? Those are some mighty high accussations for someone how has simply mae trade propsals that have only gone through if the person accepting them wanted to.

You are making some pretty unsubstantiated accusations here guys and you should check yourself before you say more moronic stuff. It is appauling you guys would suggest that about me, it's really discouraging to think I have done anything to suggest any shadyness. All I have so far is trade proposals and a few trades here or there you guys ahve whined about that have panned out to be worse for me than Nate.

It only shows just how much you guys will "imagine" based on nothing... which ironically was shown in the OSU thread over and over even after things were proven wrong. Now this... why am I surprised you guys take it to this level... wow... and it is all my fault! Amazing... but you are right, I shouldn't expect you guys to take into consideration the fact that I have never doe anything like that, sorry, I should expect you to jump to conclusions.

Seriously, if this is really going to be that big of a deal and you guys are going to really make accusation as you have, I'm just going to do a self ban from the forum for a month. Evidently saying that someones opinion is bad makes you shady then I don't want to be part of that or associate with those who are going to take a supposedly fun side game and find reasons to question someons character over it after not doing a dang thing wrong. If you guys are going to be like that then I seriously am not intersted in being part of that. Especially after all this time, I would have expected more from you guys.